Central Administrative Tribunal
Aadil Gulzar vs PLANNING DEVELOPMENT AND MONITORING on 2 November 2026
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL SRINAGAR
Order Sheet
Item no.: 3
O.A./1214/2026 (SRINAGAR)
[ APPOINTMENT ]
Court No.: 2
No of Adjournment:
Order Dated: 02/11/2026
AADIL GULZAR
Vs
PLANNING DEVELOPMENT AND MONITORING
For Applicant(s) Advocate : MR. MOHAMMAD IBRAHIM MEHRAJ AND MR. AHMAD
BASAUD
For Respondent(s) Advocate : MR. SATINDER SINGH, AAG, MR. SHAH AMIR ALONG
WITH MS. FARHAT RIYAZ FOR JKPSC THROUGH VIRTUAL MODE
Order of The Tribunal
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Through the medium of the instant O.A., the applicant seeks the following reliefs:
a. By issuance of an appropriate order or direction, the Present Original Application be admitted for hearing;
b. By issuance of an appropriate order or direction, that the exclusion of the applicant from the appointment list be declared as illegal, arbitrary and violative of fundamental rights of the applicant.
c. By issuance of an appropriate order or direction, the impugned order/appointment list be quashed/set-aside/modified to the extent it excludes the applicant from appointment to the said post.
d. By issuance of an appropriate order or direction, the respondents be directed to appoint the applicant to the said post given his qualification and merit.
e. Any other order or direction which the Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case, be also passed in favor of the Applicant and against the respondents.
2. The applicant is aggrieved of Government Order no: 54-JK(PD&MD) of 2026 issued on 11.05.2026 whereby his name has not been included amongst the list of candidates appointed for the post of Assistant Director (E&S) in the Pay Level-8 (47600-151100) in Jammu and Kashmir Economics & Statistics (Gazetted) Service, Planning, Development & Monitoring Department, despite having qualified all the examinations and fulfilling all the essential criteria necessary for appointment to the said post. As stated, the applicant has all the necessary qualification prescribed for selection to the said posts and has qualified the written examination, interview as well as the medical examination, however his name has been excluded from the appointment list issued via the impugned order.
3. It is stated in the O.A. that the appointment list includes names of candidates who are featuring far lower than the applicant in the merit list however, the applicant has been excluded from the appointment arbitrarily and as such, submitted that the impugned order is harsh, mechanical and prejudicial to the rights of the applicant.
4. Admittedly, selection does not confer a right of appointment but the applicant has a right to know as to why despite being selected and recommended, he has not been considered for his appointment.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has a legitimate expectation to know the reasons. They submit that every action of the respondents has to be backed by reason, as reason is heart and soul of every action. The applicant, as such, cannot be denied the right of consideration for his appointment, as the applicant has figured in the select list/recommendations forwarded by the J&K PSC vide letter no. PSC- DR/DR/AD(P)/2023-24/(7417142) dated 30.12.2025.
6. Issue notice upon the respondents. Mr. Satinder Singh, learned AAG for respondents no. 1 to 3 and Mr. Shah Amir for respondent no. 4, appear and accept notices for the respondents. However, Mr. Shah Amir, at the same time, submits that once recommendations have been forwarded by the JKPSC in terms of the law laid down by the Hon'ble High Court of J&K, the JKPSC is functus officio, as such, the case has to be considered by the intending department to which the recommendations have already been made. Learned counsel for the respondents shall file their detailed response.
7. In the meantime, having regard to the communication dated 29.01.2026 wherein the select list of 40 candidates under OM category has been recommended, while as the appointment orders have only been issued as regards 39 candidates under OM Category, vide Government Order No. 54- JK (PD & MD) of 2026 dated 11.05.2026 wherein prima facie, it appears that some posts are vacant. However, subject to filing of the objections.
8. In order to preserve the subject matter of the lis, it is accordingly ordered that one post, if available, as regards the advertisement notification dated 05.03.2024 issued, shall not be filled up under the OM category. However, this Order shall be subject to the objections of the respondents.
9. Alteration/modification or reversal on motion, even on or before the date fixed in the matter.
10. List on 15.12.2026.
11. The respondents shall ensure filing of the reply. Learned counsel for the applicant shall provide copy of the O.A. to the other side by today itself. Prasant Kumar Member (A) M. S. Latif Member (J) Abhishek Punia ( court master )